But I’ve found these reasons to be invalid.
First, the fact that Bitcoin can be used as a type of currency cannot justify its value. For something to be useful as a type of currency, it must satisfy all the following conditions:
4. It must be a long-term stored value.
Bitcoin does meet the first three conditions.
The fourth condition means it must already be considered a value before it can be used as a currency. If there isn’t independent support for its having value, the claim that Bitcoin has value is circular. See below:
1. Bitcoin is a value because it can be used as a currency.
2. Bitcoin can be used as a currency because it is a [long-term stored] value.
And after stating all that is contained in OP, you expect usto just dump bitcoin or cryptocurrencies and then, move on with our lives with fiat and be okay with it. By the way,
Isn't what is contained in the quote above contractive? Looking at point 4 and 2 as at above, following your introductory statement.
I think you @OP seems to attach value of to what is tangible and have got government backings. Anything other than that is banned to fail from your view point as I see it. I may be wrong and stands to be corrected but, that's what I can deduce from that and I don't seem to agree.
Intangible things have value too and the value to a commodity is largely based on acceptance by the masses. Perhaps I refuse to buy at your "Ask" price, it simply means I don't value it as much and you refused to sell at my "Bid" price simply means, you value it far more than I do value it. Yeah, demand and supply sets the price but, no government backings doesn't mean failure.